Kingsley Idehen wrote:
> On 8/3/11 12:08 PM, Markus Lanthaler wrote:
>> Kingsley Idehen wrote:
>>> We currently use: application/x-json+ld .
>> What was the rationale behind this? Why didn't you use
>> application/x-ld+json?
>
> Cos I had to make the decision in nano seconds, literally. We can change
> it once there is clear consensus :-)
+1 from me for application/ld+json to signify +json compatibility.
and +1 for application/x-ld+json in the interim until there is a proper
mime type registered, which is good practise / following the rules.
note: not application/x-json+ld
Best,
Nathan